केन्द्रीय सचू ना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गगं नाथ माग,ग मनु नरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई दिल्ली, New Delhi – 110067 नितीय अपील संख्या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOEIT/A/2024/115723 Shri S A SRIHDAR … अपीलकता/ग Appellant VERSUS/बनाम PIO, …प्रनतवािीगण /Respondent Ministry Of Electronics & Information Technology Date of Hearing : 03.07.2025 Date of Decision : 03.07.2025 Chief Information Commissioner : Shri Heeralal Samariya Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 12.03.2024 PIO replied on : 21.03.2024 First Appeal filed on : 25.03.2024 First Appellate Order on : 28.03.2024 2ndAppeal/complaint received on : 04.05.2024 Information sought and background of the case:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 12.03.2024 seeking information on following points:-

“The number of times the Adhaar Card bearing Number XXX in the name of Mrs P Samboornammal Baskar Reddiyar of Kainoor Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Ranipet District, Tamilnadu-631003 has undergone updations or corrections like change of name, address etc.

since 01/01/2021.

Kindly furnish the date of updation / correction and nature of updation / correction with or without mentioning details.

Kindly furnish the details of the documents that were relied upon for making the above updation/correction.”

The CPIO, Ministry Of Electronics & Information Technology vide letter dated 21.03.2024 replied as under:-

“Aadhaar identity information and authentication records are ➤

confidential in nature and cannot ordinarily be shared as per Section 28 (2) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016.

The information requested by the applicant pertains to Third ➤

party. Third party details cannot be shared under Section 8(1)(j)

of RTI Act.”

Dissatisfied with the response received from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 25.03.2024. The FAA vide order dated 28.03.2024 upheld the reply of CPIO.

Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal.

Written submission dated 25.06.2025 has been received from the Appellant and same has been taken on record for perusal.

Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:

Appellant: Present through video-conferencing.

Respondent: Ms. Priya Shreekumar, Dy. Director- participated in the hearing.

The Respondent stated that the Aadhaar identity information and authentication records are confidential in nature and cannot ordinarily be shared as per Section 28 (2) of the Aadhaar Act, 2016. Furthermore, the information requested by the applicant pertains to Third party and same is exempted under Section 8(1)(j) of RTI Act.

Decision:

Commission has gone through the case records and on the basis of proceedings during hearing observes that appellant has sought information which qualifies as personal information of third-party and same is exempted from disclosure as per Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. Further no larger public interest has been invoked by the Appellant. In view of this, Commission finds it pivotal to highlight a landmark judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein aspect of “personal information” has been explained in a highly structured manner. In this regard, ratio laid down in the matter of Central Public Information Officer, Supreme Court of India Vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal in Civil Appeal No. 10044 of 2010 with Civil Appeal No. 10045 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No. 2683 of 2010. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as under:

“…59. Reading of the aforesaid judicial precedents, in our opinion, would indicate that personal records, including name, address, physical, mental and psychological status, marks obtained, grades and answer sheets, are all treated as personal information. Similarly, professional records, including qualification, performance, evaluation reports, ACRs, disciplinary proceedings, etc. are all personal information. Medical records, treatment, choice of medicine, list of hospitals and doctors visited, findings recorded, including that of the family members, inform